Susan Hiller. At least, I am.

Oh,allright then.I'm not familiar with her work so i can't say.

Bump! Just for you Brian.

hmmmm.... kiss kiss

I wonder what Mr Sewell would make of this board? "Ugh, a bunch of pseudo-intelligent riff-raff pontificating about the issues of the day. How truly unpleasant."

i virtually like nothing that tracy emin has done.

shock art has been done to death and art movements are only relevent when they have something original and worthwhile to say

fuck this shit

I disagree. Fluxus, Dada and the Aktionists all spring to mind. All, in part, sprang out of a desire to resist the (then-contemporary) stoicism (in the pejorative sense) or austerity of the art-generations prior. An incredibly blithe statement, but even so, regardless of the worth of the art movements, it's the quality of the work that's important. Dada or surrealism are interesting to me because of the latent violence, the implicit reactionary/ counter-reactionary element, but I don't necessarily think they have particularly 'worthwhile' things to say. Or, better, art exists in a continuum; there is no purely 'original' art.

If it makes you feel comfortable the last word of this post will be cock.

Cock.

Yeah, I understand the continuum of art so I'll give you that. But I find those movements to have been worthwhile by bringing something to the table via their philosophy; dada's embracing of the irrational in the face of the soulless war machine, surrealism's embracing of dream imagery, fluxus' breaking down of media boundaries. Those are all worthwhile to me. This stuff is just contrary as far as my untrained eye can see.

And to counter your cock; vagina.

See, there have been a handful of Stuckist things that are alright. I can't remember any of them, but someone showed me a picture once. I quite like a fair few YBAs. I quite like a few people who aren't YBAs. The point isn't so much that vacuousness is good, it's that no particular ideology (or a no-ideology) is good in and of itself, it's what a personartist does within certain frameworks (or lack of frameworks). I'm starting to sound like fucking Heidegger now so I'm going to stop.

I'm just going to pop in and say that Sol LeWitt, Jenny Holzer and Frank Stella can all eat a giant bag of dicks. Or they can each eat an individual bag of dicks if they don't want to split one.
This has nothing to do with anything.
Umm, cock.

My opinion = Tracey Emin - some stuff=alright.
Hirst = cunt. Stuff=mostly shite.

Stuckists = yes, painting is good but don't bloody go on about it. Plus, they are comically reactionary ie "you're not an artist if you can't paint". They're obviously looking for a reaction.

any real artist has better things to do than to argue what is and what is not for the sake of it.

their art exists, simply. it just is.

I agree.
I also think people tend to spend far too much time talking about "bad" art that they hate, instead of talking about the artists and art that they do actually enjoy. The bad* art receives ridiculous amounts of press, and the good is ignored.


Explain yourself sir or im going to come to your house and project a bag of dicks onto your wall. va-jay-jay.






----------------
*It's Not Bad Art, It's Just My Brain Hurts

OK, I will use this opportunity to use Holzer's super-limp "concept" against her.


This is art, now. Remember that.


Conceptual artists whose tiresome medium of choice is the cryptic sentence need to go away.

I'm sorry. It is not "confrontational," "challenging" or "thought-provoking." It is dumb. And incredibly regurgitative.

go see some dieter roth hes dead now but he was pretty hardcore for his day and age